Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language

Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• Note:
  • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
  • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
  • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

• The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

March 19

grauben, gräuben

Are they pronounced differently in German? The latter is a girl's name in Verne's Journey to the Center of the Earth. Thanks for any help. --Omidinist (talk) 11:36, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

They are indeed pronounced differently in German, with the first one being like 'GROW-ben' and the second being more like 'GROY-ben'. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 12:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Just to clarify KageTora's response, the first syllable of grauben rhymes with cow, not hoe. Deor (talk) 13:12, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Aha - thanks. It never even occurred to me. I was thinking 'growl' without the 'l', and not 'grow'.... --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 13:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Note though, that Verne actually spelled her name "Graüben". The vowels "aü" (unlike "äu") do not form a diphthong commonly used in Standard German. If I had to pronounce it, and knew it wasn't a typo for "äu", I might actually pronounce the diphthong "aü" as ɑ + y, the way it would be pronounced in rarely occurring compounds made from one word ending in "-a" and another beginning with "ü-", as in "Salsaübung" (for want of a better example). ---Sluzzelin talk 15:48, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Off-topic, but to give you an example of two verbs which only differ in their usage of "au" or "äu", and follow KageTora and Deor's pronunciation instructions (and also have an interesting relationship to one another): "saugen means "to suck", while säugen means "to suckle" (to nurse at the breast, wiktionary translates it as "to lactate"). "saügen", on the other hand, does not exist at all, and hurts my eyes. ---Sluzzelin talk 17:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Slaüzzelin has a certain slimy-oozy quality to it.  :) -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:00, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I've been called slushbrain here, and pronouncing my moniker has been likened to being sozzled, but slime and ooze?! Shall we say pistols at dawn? ---Sluzzelin talk 19:17, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Your place or mine? -- Jack of Oooozze [your turn] 19:20, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Anyway, your eyes will be hurting too much to focus properly. You'd probably hit a passing bushwalker. Better find a more peaceful way. Shall we say Scrabble boards at dawn?  :) -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:39, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Note that she is described in the book as a "Virlandaise", which as I understand it means somebody from the northern part of Estonia. Looie496 (talk) 17:43, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, see Vironians. 80.123.210.172 (talk) 18:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you all, though your discussion makes me a little puzzled. The girl's name in the book is spelled gräuben as I said earlier; see here, p 16.--Omidinist (talk) 19:52, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

That's the English translation; they seem to have cleaned it up. See the original here. --Trovatore (talk) 20:35, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Does French ever use umlaut to indicate diaeresis as sometimes occurs in English? For example, coöperate. See also Trema (diacritic). Perhaps Verne was just giving pronunciation instructions and the English translation is the mistkae. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 20:45, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't think French does that, but I suppose your suggestion is borderline possible. It seems much more likely to me that Verne intended it to be a German spelling (yes, I understand that the girl was not German) but that he just wasn't very good at German, or his editors weren't. --Trovatore (talk) 22:41, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

To the best of my knowledge, Graüben is not a German name. I did, however, stumble upon a textual alnalysis where the author muses that Graüben may be a "pun" on the German verb graben (to dig / to excavate). If so, it strikes me as rather awkward and I (a German native speaker) would never have guessed the connection. Maybe we have an Estonian speaker who could comment on the name? --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:03, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I believe you that it's not a German name. Google results give me the idea that it's a name Verne made up himself. Virtually all the hits seem to be for the novel. Still, my speculation is that he made it up on the pattern of what he thought were German-ish names. --Trovatore (talk) 23:07, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

"Tell"?

I was randomly browsing some blogs a while ago, and came across this kind of comment: He will be here tell the 15th. What does "tell" mean here? Is it some feature of the English language I am unaware of, because of my having learned English as an entirely foreign language? JIP | Talk 18:49, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I would say it's a typo for "till". Or someone who genuinely believes that "tell" is the right word. Maybe the same class of people who write "then" or "that" when they mean "than". ("Obama is a better president then that than Bush".) -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 18:55, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

The confusion of "then" and "than" is common enough, but I've been fortunate enough to not have seen "that" confused with either, so far. (I do then agree that a 3-way confusion is worse than a 2-way confusion.) StuRat (talk) 20:23, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to ruin your day, but here's an example of "that" used instead of "than". -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 20:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

How do you know it's not just a typo ? StuRat (talk) 21:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair question, but how do we know "then" is not a typo for "than" in many cases either? I've seen "that" used instead of "than" often enough to make me believe there's a significant group of language users who think it's the right word. With what we see online (and elsewhere) these days, there seems no end of creative (= wrong) ways of writing and spelling. Where they get these ideas from in the first place - search me. I'm forever getting emails with the word "definitely" spelt as "defiantly". A colleague of mine spells "hotel" as "hottle". And I think I've mentioned before about the forms we hand out to clients, embarrassingly headed "Statuary Declaration". I could go on. It's not as if they actually pronounce these words the way they write them (except maybe "statuary"). -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 00:31, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

"That" could be a literal translation from Italian. (Perhaps French or Spanish as well.) --Trovatore (talk) 10:30, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

My favorite is the "statue of limitations". Sounds as if it could refer to Lady Justice, in a negative way, as being incapable of telling the innocent from the guilty because, after all, she's blindfolded and can't see the evidence. :-) StuRat (talk) 10:25, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

(ec) It's probably a misspelling of till, shortening of until. Some accents make /ɛ/ and /ɪ/ very similar, if not almost indistinguishable. Lexicografía (talk) 18:57, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Can't let this go: The word till is not in fact a shortening of until. Till is a perfectly good word on its own. The misunderstanding that it's short for until seems to be behind the spelling 'til, which is arguably a sort of hypercorrection, although well enough established by now to be considered an acceptable variant (though I wouldn't use it myself). --Trovatore (talk) 19:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, right. Lexicografía (talk) 19:52, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Looks like a lowland Scottish pronunciation to me.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

'How came you'

In the following usage:

"How comes it that the Church has attained such greatness in temporal power"(The Prince, 1513)

I understand that 'How comes it' is olde timey speak for 'How did it come to pass' or 'How did it come to be' but what I'm wondering if I can use that type of phrasing in the following ways:

How came you by this knowledge? (by what means, non-material)

How came you to my house? (by what means, material)

Is there a word governing this kind of usage, (besides: archaic, obsolete, old-fashioned etc.) I mean, is there some kind of linguistic concept for "how comes it" i.e. transitive, periphrastic, gerundive (not that those are options, i mean, those kind of words)

Sorry for my vaugeries, I'm not good at articulation199.94.68.201 (talk) 20:14, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

It's an impersonal verb, isn't it? Adam Bishop (talk) 21:53, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

The real question is not so much, why we say 'How did you come to my house?', but why we don't say 'How came you to my house?'. From Brittonicisms in English#Change from syntheticism towards analyticism:

DO-periphrasis in a variety of uses. Modern English is dependent on a semantically neutral 'do' in some negative statements and questions, e.g. 'I don't know' rather than 'I know not". This feature is linguistically very rare. Celtic languages use a similar structure, but without dependence. The usage is frequent in Cornish and Middle Cornish. e.g."Omma ny wreugh why tryge"="You do not stay here" and it is used in Middle Breton. "Do" is more common in Celtic Englishes than Standard English.

Middle Welsh too: "Ef a or6c a ... " = "He did and" often in the White Book of Rhydderch ("6" is not a mistake: it's one of the common ways of transliterating an obsolete letter which corresponds to "w" or "u" in later Welsh).

(OR warning): I conjecture that one of the factors behind the spread of do-periphrasis for negatives in English was that Jespersen's Cycle had left English with an uncharacteristic Head-Modifier order, e.g. "I go not". This doesn't account for interrogatives though. --ColinFine (talk) 01:00, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

While this feature exists to some extent in other Germanic languages such as in German dialects, I believe English is unique among them in using it so consistently. So you could say that you are opting out of the do-periphrasis. It is implicit in such a statement that you then use the same grammar for questions that the other Germanic languages do. Hans Adler 22:36, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I know not if you have had much exposure to Early Modern English. Hast thou ever read Shakespeare or the King James Bible? Then thou shouldst know what I mean. It was very similar to today's English, but it was still common to form sentences that nowadays sound like a word-by-word translation from German, Dutch or Danish. This paper describes how the do-periphrasis became obligatory in English questions during that period. Hans Adler 22:46, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Right, the use of "do" this way is an English trick that has taken off relatively recently. Would not be shocked to learn to came from a Celtic influence. Note to the original poster though: The Prince was written in Italian, so the grammar you are quoting is someone's translation, not Machiavelli's. This comes from CHAPTER XI — CONCERNING ECCLESIASTICAL PRINCIPALITIES. Here it is in Italian. "Nevertheless, if any one should ask of me how comes it that the Church has attained such greatness in temporal power" was really "on di manco, se alcuno mi ricercassi donde viene che la Chiesa, nel temporale, sia venuta a tanta grandezza". My Italian is not good enough to say if this sounds old fashioned, but at least concerning the verb we are discussing I think not.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:15, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, on di manco is certainly not ordinary contemporary Italian, nor is alcuno, and ricercare today means "research". Also donde might be a little more used than whence is in English, but not by a huge factor. And a temporale is a brief rainstorm. So by and large, yes, the sentence sounds pretty old-fashioned, but considering when it was written, certainly not excessively so. --Trovatore (talk) 16:51, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

(I should say, alcuno is not contemporary Italian in the sense used here; that would be qualcuno. You could maybe find it in a sentence like non ho visto alcuno scoiattolo, "I did not see any squirrel", where I had to choose the noun carefully because for most nouns it would be alcun or alcuna rather than alcuno. That's maybe still kind of old-fashioned, but not 16th-century old-fashioned.) --Trovatore (talk) 22:17, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

March 20

Strange or unique verbs

What are some very strange or unique verbs in Spanish and French? I don't mean necessarily extremely irregular (like être/aller ; ser/ir), but verbs that exhibit strange features. To give you an idea: the apostrophe is a part of the (single) verb in French entr'ouvrir (or was before the advent of Newspeak 1990 spelling reforms); s'asseoir has at least three complete and distinct ways of conjugation in the present indicative. 72.128.95.0 (talk) 02:06, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

One category is defective verbs, which lack certain tenses or persons in their conjugations. An interesting example in French is gésir, which is rarely used except in the phrase "ci-gît", "here lies", although authors sometimes try to resurrect or invent other forms, e.g. "je gésirai" or "je gîrai", "I will lie".[1] Lesgles (talk) 14:35, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Entr'ouvrir is not the unique verb with an apostrophe: entr'apercevoir, entr'apparaître, entr'appeler, entr'égorger, entr'aimer. — AldoSyrt (talk) 09:01, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

The French verb créer has the feminine past participle form créée. Of interest is wikt:Category:French defective verbs. —Internoob (Talk · Cont · Wikt) 23:33, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I have just discovered this! The French verb paître is defective. The past participle and the compound tenses of this verb are used only in Falconry! Paître un oiseau is "to feed a bird". — AldoSyrt (talk) 09:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Greek, Hindi, Russian, Punjabi, and Serbian help

http://www.peelschools.org/greek/home/ has the Greek name of the Peel District School Board, and http://www.peelschools.org/russian/home/ has the Russian, http://www.peelschools.org/hindi/home/ has the Hindi, and http://www.peelschools.org/punjabi/home/ has the Punjabi

How are the names typed?

I want to add the names to Talk:Peel_District_School_Board#Other_languages

And does http://www.peelschools.org/serbian/home/ have a distinct name for the "Peel District School Board"?

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 05:44, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I think "Το Σχολικο Συμβούλιο της Επαρχιας του Peel" is the Greek. "Peel" is not transliterated, and since that page always says "welcome to..." or "in the...", I might have gotten the declensions wrong. Adam Bishop (talk) 09:19, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

The Russian is "Школьныӥ Совет Раӥона Пил", but I know nothing about Russian grammar, so the first word is probably declined somehow after the preposition "в" (it also begins "welcome to..." Adam Bishop (talk) 09:35, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

No, "Школьныӥ Совет" is the accusative singular after "в", which happens to be identical to the nominative for a masculine noun and adjective. (I believe the same is true for the Greek, as it happens, though that one is neuter rather than masculine). Incidentally, "совет" is the word "soviet", which means "council". --ColinFine (talk) 10:04, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

The Hindi doesn't translate/transliterate the name at all. I'm pretty sure the Hindi just says "You are welcome (in)to" ("men apka svagata hain", I think). Similarly the Serbian: "Dobro došli u" = "Welcome to".

I must say that I'm puzzled why you think this effort is worthwhile. What's the point of filling the talk page with translations which will either never be referred to, or else will be used by people who are probably more proficient at the relevant language than you are? --ColinFine (talk) 10:14, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

1. Those translations are going to the Commons as soon as I can find a good picture of a facility of the PDSB - I wish to create an image category for the PDSB, and then state the different language names of the district in that category (Example: Commons:Category:Toronto District School Board)

2. Those are destination names for any possible Wikipedia articles about this district in other languages. Because this district has a parent/student base which speaks many languages, it would be worthwhile for Wikipedias of other languages to have entries on this school district.

WhisperToMe (talk) 15:05, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Certainly it would be; but if somebody chooses to make an article about it in Hindi or Serbian, aren't they going to be more proficient in the language than you, or me? But maybe the Commons reason is a good one. --ColinFine (talk) 21:10, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Typically what I do for languages like Hindi and Serbian is that once I get the name of the school district, then I go to the local language Wiki and post at the Embassy or on an interested party's talk page and ask for a request to make a stub, and state "please post the article at XXXX". - If the language(s) is/are French, Spanish, and/or Chinese I try to make a stub myself, and hope that a person who is more proficient will expand the stub. I link to the stub from relevant pages so the stub is visible.

WhisperToMe (talk) 21:29, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Added Serbian and Croatian [2]. As in Russian, the accusative case is the same as nominative. No such user (talk) 10:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I made a minor correction to the talk page - the Russian letter Й is different from the Udmurt letter Ӥ. --Theurgist (talk) 05:22, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Ah! Thank you very much :) WhisperToMe (talk) 16:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The Hindi name is पील डिस्ट्रिक्ट स्कूल बोर्ड, written in parenthesis after the english name. --Soman (talk) 18:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Aha, so there is a Hindi name. Thank you very much :) WhisperToMe (talk) 18:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

deutsch grammatik

wo kann man einen kaffee trinken? Plz answer the question without any grammaticall mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Datarka5 (talk • contribs) 06:50, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Technically, the question itself has a grammatical mistake. JIP | Talk 10:10, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to the Wikipedia Reference Desk. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misinterpretation, but it is our policy here not to do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn nearly as much as doing it yourself. Please attempt to solve the problem or answer the question yourself first. If you need help with a specific part of your homework, feel free to tell us where you are stuck and ask for help. If you need help grasping the concept of a problem, by all means let us know. --ColinFine (talk) 10:23, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Google Translate says the sentence is asking, "Where can you drink a coffee?" There's more than one possible answer to that question, regardless of language. Does the OP want a series of possible answers, or is he looking for a specific answer to be translated back to German? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:54, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

If this is a homework question there is an answer which translates as "you can drink coffee in a coffee house". He should be able to sort his answer out from that. --TammyMoet (talk) 17:01, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Or "drink cafe in a cafe", as it were. But you can drink coffee most anywhere that doesn't have a sign saying "no food or drink allowed on premises." My answer would have been aus einer Kaffeetasse, or something like that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:08, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

That would be the answer to "Woraus kann man Kaffee trinken?" So it probably won't impress the OP's German teacher. ---Sluzzelin talk 17:48, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Isn't it great when the first respondent says the question is being regarded as homework and we're not going to answer it, and then the next respondent ignores that and just comes out with an answer. That's a really fine example of the collegiate spirit at work. Not. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 18:42, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

The question has not actually been answered, since we don't know for sure what the answer is supposed to be. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:52, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

That evades the point entirely, Bugs. It doesn't matter a tinker's cuss what the OP wants. It's a homework question and so we shouldn't be providing ANY answer. Period. Unless they come back with evidence they've made an attempt, or evidence it's not homework - neither of which has happened here. Otherwise, we may as well just tear up all the instructions at the top. Just because OPs routinely ignore them does not mean respondents should. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:15, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Then box up the section and be done with it. Did it ever occur to you that someone else might be interested in the question? I've asked a followup question that has still not been answered to my satisfaction. Is there a German language subtlety that somehow forces the answer to be "in a cafe"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:27, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

There is not; I expect the question was meant to test the use of prepositions with the indefinite article, or perhaps word order, so that any logical answer (café, kitchen, etc.) with the correct grammar would satisfy. Lesgles (talk) 19:37, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I see. Well, the OP hasn't been back. Should this section be boxed, or maybe deleted? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→

Delete your own posts if you must. But do not delete anything I've written. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 19:58, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

• I'm not surprised that the OP hasn't come back. Textbook eample of "how to bite the newbies". First response is to attack the question, and that's followed by the usual ABF about anything that might possibly be a homework question, and demands the questioner proves his innocence. Still, I suppose the OP got an accurate picture of the Wikipedia community - a bunch of grumpy, suspicious, snide misanthropes. DuncanHill (talk) 20:09, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Along with attacking other editors in full view of the OP, which also adds to that picture. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:14, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
  • (ec) The question was hardly from the Parnassus of Good English, yet it was demanding we provide an error-free answer. That was well worth noting. It also strongly suggested the answer is needed for a homework assignment. We have a rule (remember "rules") that we do not do OP's homework for them. It's nothing to do with assuming bad faith. Colin Fine welcomed the OP, while also advising that we have a rule about not answering homework questions. It was all fine up to that point. Nothing grumpy or misanthropic about any of that. Then Baseball Bugs ignored the rule and provided an answer anyway. His thing about other people being interested in the answer too, is an incredibly silly smokescreen. Like, we can provide answers that are visible to the whole world, but invisible to the OP? Hmmmm. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 20:19, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

(ec)The question appears to me to be from someone for whom English is not the first language. It's also the first post by a new user, which ought (but here never does) earn someone a little kindness (remember "kindness" Jack?). The very first response was an attack on the question - which might be "fine" to you Jack but strikes me as low. The template used by Colin is a blatant assumption of bad faith. Not one of you though it worth helping our OP by giving them a welcome box - I suppose none of you can see a redlinked talk page when it's staring you in the face, or maybe you just don't think it's worth trying to help new editors? DuncanHill (talk)

I'm really struggling with your defence of this, Duncan. Colin used the standard wording given to anyone who comes here asking what appears to be a homework question. I don't know who worked out the set of words, but they seem perfectly fine to me. It starts with a friendly "welcome". Then "Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misinterpretation .." That is hardly an assumption of "bad faith". It's an assessment based on the evidence before us. It's not saying the OP is an evil person or has done a bad thing or anything remotely like that. It's simply advising them that we have a long-standing policy in these sorts of cases, and why. An apology in the event our assessment is flawed, is also not my idea of impropriety or unkindness, but exactly the opposite. The OP has had every opportunity to come back and respond, to correct Colin's misinterpretation, if indeed it was a misinterpretation. They have chosen not to do so. That's where the matter should have rested. Duncan, if you have any issue with us ever using the standard wording that Colin used in the first response to the OP, then please take it up in the appropriate forum. If you don't want to do that, then please do not criticise it piecemeal as an example of "unkindness". -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 22:15, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

As soon as that template gets used, some people seems to stop thinking for themselves - you criticised those who seemed to think it acceptable to answer, and you demanded the OP prove himself innocent before anyone answer him. Questioners should not be expected to prove themselves worthy of our attention - if you don't want to try to help someone then fine, just don't do it. Instead you ask someone to prove a negative, and have a go at those who do try to help. You assumed bad faith of the OP, and you assumed bad faith of those who tried to answer, accusing them of lacking collegiate spirit. You really ought to take a step back and look at yourself. DuncanHill (talk) 22:48, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

High time this went to the talk page. See you there. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 00:33, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Any simple and short answer will follow the subsequent scheme: In (that is the most frequently used preposition) + einem / einer / einem (that is the indefinite article, masculine, feminine or neuter) + Lokus (that is a placeholder for the actual location, the gender of which must correspond to the preceding article). The location must be in the Dative case. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:29, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

PS: It is possible that your teacher expects you to repeat the kernel of the question when answering. If you omit this kernel then the sentence lacks a subject and a verb. So, a "proper" answer would be: Man kann einen Kaffee <insert fragment as per above guidelines> trinken. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Well I am sorry if what I did offended anyone, but I fail to see how giving someone a pointer which may be of use to them is "doing their homework for them". Surely it's the least we can do? --TammyMoet (talk) 21:39, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Traditional Chinese help

I am trying to get the Chinese title of the document from page 1, but the characters become funny when pasted from this PDF

The document is at http://www.houstonisd.org/HISDConnectEnglish/Images/PDF/howmaywehelpyou.pdf

I am trying to post the name of the document since it is a source cited at zh:休斯顿独立学区

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 23:19, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

歡迎您加入休士頓獨立學區　我們怎麼樣來協助您? Oda Mari (talk) 05:39, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much! WhisperToMe (talk) 22:02, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

March 21

Chinese to Sanskrit

A popular Chinese martial art legend says the Zen patriarch Bodhidharma wrote a treatise on Taoist-like breathing and stretching exercieses called the the Yijin Jing. This is commonly translated as the Muscle- or Tendon-Changing Classic (易筋经). Modern scholarship has shown this legend is spurious, and that the treatise was actually written by a Taoist during the 17th century. Despite this, I am interested to know how one would say Muscle-Changing / Tendon-Changing Classic in Sanskrit. I imagine Sutra would be used in place of Classic. This website lists several words for muscles, but I am unsure if they refer to a particular muscle. I am looking for an overall sense of the word. The same goes for tendon and change. Perhaps "metamorphosis" would be better? This is also used in English translations.

This is for a story I am working on. I do not intend to add the information to any article. Thank you in advance to all who reply. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 00:26, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Active user who knows Hawaiian language

Is there any active users who know the Hawaiian language out there?

Of the users listed in Category:User haw, none of the native or near-native speakers have edited in 2011. Of the intermediate level speakers, only User:Groink has been editing Wikipedia recently (three days ago). ---Sluzzelin talk 03:06, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

See http://librarieshawaii.org/services/reference.htm. -- Wavelength (talk) 06:05, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Vowels in Arabic, English, and German

At talk:Jamahiriya, I found this:

Due to the nature of the grammar of the Arabic language, related words in Arabic will often have the same consonants, but with different vowels in different places. This is highly-systematic within the Semitic languages,

I've never studied Arabic, but I've had some exposure to Swahili, and in Swahili it seems every bit as easy to tell which words are derived from Arabic as it is to tell which words in English are derived from Greek. I seem to recall noticing this variation in vowels there too. E.g. the noun safari and the verb safiri.

Now as it happens, I recently read part of John McWhorter's book Our Magnificent Bastard Tongue, and he seems sympathetic to the view that proto-Germanic came about as a result of mixing of ancient languages of northern Europe with Phoenician, a Semitic language (in particular, he mentions that fully 30 percent of proto-Germanic verbs cannot be traced to Indo-European, and says nothing like that happens in other Indo-European language groups). So I'm wondering: could this explain the way vowels change with forms in English, and to a greater extent in German? E.g. with tenses of strong verbs: find, found; get, got, swim, swam, swum, keep, kept. Or in some irregular plurals: mouse, mice, foot, feet, goose, geese, etc. (In English there seems to be only one adjective where the vowel is different in the comparative form: old, elder—and that one's used only when talking about people, and not always then. In German there are zillions like that.) Michael Hardy (talk) 03:53, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

This isn't just a Germanic thing, although it is typical of Germanic strong verbs. It is found throughout Indo-European languages. See Indo-European ablaut. So, Phoenician, which is unlikely to have influenced Germanic languages anyway, probably also would not have influenced an already-existing system of sound changes in Indo-European languages, especially not by means of the Semitic system of triconsonantal roots, which is actually quite unlike what happens in Indo-European. Adam Bishop (talk) 09:10, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

...and of course in German it's not just verbs; it's plurals of nouns and comparatives and superlatives of adjectives, and it's derivations of adjectives from nouns (and maybe other things too). Michael Hardy (talk) 16:29, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, the vowel changes definitely have nothing to do with Phoenician influence. On the other hand, I'd agree that the results of IE ablaut are broadly similar to the systems found in Semitic. The original IE system is usually said to have been connected to stress, unlike the Semitic one; however, I see that the wiki article actually cites some people who have argued that IE ablaut originally worked like Semitic. --91.148.159.4 (talk) 15:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Michael Hardy -- You should have gone to article Semitic root (as I originally suggested in those remarks of mine which you cut-and-pasted). Semitic "root-and-pattern" morphology and Germanic strong verbs can both be considered examples of apophony in a general linguistic sense, but the Semitic languages carry it far beyond anything to be found in Indo-European languages. In any case, ca. 3,500 B.C. (which is about as far back as things can be historically reconstructed), the Semitic languages were probably still found more to the south of the fertile crescent than in the fertile crescent itself, while the Indo-European languages were probably spoken in an area of southern Russia and/or eastern Ukraine north of the Caucasus -- so the idea of direct mutual influence between the language groups at an early stage seems quite unlikely. This hasn't prevented people from positing a "Nostratic" group, but Nostratic isn't widely accepted by scholars. I really don't understand what the Phoenician-Germanic thing is supposed to mean -- these languages had quite minimal historical contact, and ablaut seems to have been well-established in early Indo-European... AnonMoos (talk) 18:47, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Theo Vennemann has posited a number of Germanic borrowings from Semitic languages, most prominently the root of "earth". If you want, I could dig out a specific article of his (from Transactions of the Philological Society) which mentions several of his suggestions, with references. --ColinFine (talk) 00:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The most prominent undisputed shared Semitic-IE vocabulary items which are not late loanwords (such as "bull" ταυρος / ثور and "wine" vinum / οινος / יין) seem to involve a second millennium B.C. Mediterranean cultural context, and in many or most cases may have been borrowed from third languages into both IE and Semitic (and these words do not appear to have been formed through apophony). AnonMoos (talk) 07:18, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

That reminds me of Anglo-Israelists in the 19th century who thought the Germanic peoples were one of the Lost Tribes. I remember they said "earth" was Semitic, and various other words, like the German "Pferd". Adam Bishop (talk) 07:23, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Assyria and Germany in Anglo-Israelism.... AnonMoos (talk) 15:20, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The theory that McWhorter seemed sympathetic to said Phoenicians sailed to the coast of what is now Germany and Denmark. Michael Hardy (talk) 22:32, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Considering that there's only quite indirect and circumstantial evidence at best for the view that the Phoenicians ever went directly to Cornwall to trade for tin (a cherished belief among many during the 19th century), the view that they ever went to the vicinity of Hamburg seems to be very strongly implausible, and an extremely poor choice of hypothesis on which to base any linguistic theories. Our Tin sources and trade in ancient times article says "It should be noted that the idea that the Phoenicians went to Cornwall for its tin and supplied it to the whole of the Mediterranean has no archaeological basis and is largely considered a myth." What could the Phoenicians even want from Germany in the first place -- except amber, which already reached the Mediterranean through long-established overland trade routes?? AnonMoos (talk) 03:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

hoành tráng

Please explain the origin of these 2 words. Thanhks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.40.34.142 (talk) 13:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

It is Vietnamese, and it seems to mean "on a large scale".[3] It is made up of the components hoành, meaning "wide", and tráng, meaning "large". "Ngắm cảnh non sông hoành tráng" means, I think, "to contemplate a mountain river scenery on a large scale".[4] Lesgles (talk) 14:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Why do news reports use present tense?

I've never really paid attention to grammar in news reports (though I keep spotting typos!), so when a WN editor undid a change I made to an article, I wasn't surprised. I'd changed nearly all the present tense verbs to past. In fact, I was thinking why WN could possibly violate some grammar rules that are supposed to be taught in secondary schools. How embarrassed I was to find out that this is the journalism norm! :)

Anyways, I searched the Net and found a blogpost, the author of which thought it strange the newspaper headlines use present tense. Why exactly do news reports use strange tenses? When and how did this start?

BTW: I'm just trying to satisfy my hunger for knowledge. :P Kayau Voting IS evil 14:48, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I suppose that news agencies can re-use such a report later without revising it (and spending more money). However, there might be a problem if an expected event does not happen. I am curious about news reports in languages (such as Hebrew) which have different aspects for completed and uncompleted actions. Incidentally, I prefer present participles for picture captions and for Wikipedia edit summaries in English, but infinitives for Wikipedia edit summaries in French, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:08, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Kayau -- It's newspaper "Headlinese" (which has very highly-specific conventions in English), not general news writing. It's not that the past tense is absolutely banned from headlines, but there are standard conventions which make it much more likely that "X KILLED" is about X being killed (not about X doing some killing), etc. etc. AnonMoos (talk) 18:21, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

In English (and other Germanic languages) only the present tense and the past tense are simple tenses, in that they require only a single word. "I sing", "I sang", "I have sung", "I am singing", "I had sung", "I will sing", "I was singing", "I will be singing", "I will have sung", "I was going to sing", "I used to sing", "I will have been singing", etc., etc. Journalists writing headlines want to keep it short. And the simple past tense seems to presuppose that the reader knows what specific time is referred to. Michael Hardy (talk) 16:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

The above are good answers, historical present is normally what they're doing, and may be helpful. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:46, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I see that headlines want to keep it short (lazy papers :P). However, I've seen cases where the newspaper content itself uses the present tense instead of past; for example, 'state school classrooms displaying crucifixes do not violate the rights of non-Catholic pupils' would be wrong in daily life, as this is indirect/reported speech so did not should replace did not... Kayau Voting IS evil 11:56, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't think "did not" would be appropriate in that instance. It's not just about a past instance; it's about other cases that may arise. Michael Hardy (talk) 20:05, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Is there a technical term for the printer's problem...

where the cutting machine to produce books fails somewhat and instead of fully cropping a page or two, folds the bottom right corner up into the main body of the volume? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theediscerning (talk • contribs) 15:28, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Strictly, this fault arises not in the cutting stage (Book trimming), nor in the preceding signature-binding stage, but in the folding stage before that, when a corner of the imposed printed sheet becomes folded back on itself. I don't recall encountering a specific term for it while working in bookselling and pre-production book editing - it's possible that there is no industry-standard term for what is a rare and relatively trivial fault - but perhaps someone with more direct experience of print production will know of one. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.110.155 (talk) 20:50, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I looked around, but I found nothing more specific than "misbound" which, according to several book binding and book collecting glossaries, can refer to one incorrectly folded leaf too (along with incorrectly bound, upside down, etc.). ---Sluzzelin talk 15:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, both. I asked because I was hoping to sell a book with the front cover thus affected; misbound as a selling term seems the best approach to use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theediscerning (talk • contribs) 15:40, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Difference between le pavot and le coquelicot

What's the difference between le pavot and le coquelicot? My dictionary says that they both mean poppy. --70.244.234.128 (talk) 16:01, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Un coquelicot (Papaver rhoeas) is a kind of pavot (Papaveraceae). Another poppy flower is called coquelicot bleu de l'Himalaya — AldoSyrt (talk) 17:37, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

According to the French article, le coquelicot tranlates into English as "Field Poppy". Alansplodge (talk) 20:20, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Tornados or Tornadoes?

The dear old BBC surprised me by making the plural of the Panavia Tornado jet aircraft "Tornados" on several occasions. I would have thought it was "Tornadoes" like "potatoes" and "tomatoes". I was therefore even more surprised to find that when it comes to Tornado (the weather phenomenon), they spell it the other way. Any idea why anybody? Alansplodge (talk) 16:17, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Changing "o" to "oes" rather than "os" is actually the exception rather than the rule. Since the name of the airplane is a proper noun, it is governed by the general rule. By the way, most news organizations have style guides dealing with how to handle issues of grammar and spelling. You can find a copy of the BBC style guide here, but it does not deal with this particular question as far as I can see. Looie496 (talk) 17:32, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I've just realised that Wikipedia follows the same bizarre rule (see articles linked above). "Torpedoes", "cargoes", "buboes", "embargoes", "dadoes", "dominoes", "dingoes" and "Fingoes" all seem happy with an "e". There may be more. Alansplodge (talk) 20:03, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

According to English plural#Regular plurals, -oes is in fact the default (by implication for 'native English' words) when the word ends in consonant+o, but most foreign (especially Italian) loanwords as described under English plural#Almost-regular plurals take -os. There would be a tendency for a native English speaker to read an unfamiliar word ending in -os as rhyming (roughly) with "toss" rather than "toes", but as always, such "rules" emerge out of analysing unregulated usage, rather than being stipulated by some (nonexistant) authoritative power. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.110.155 (talk) 21:10, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I notice that several British newspapers form the jet plural without the "e". There seems to be an informal rule that proper nouns can form the plural with just an "s", even when the common noun needs "es". Dbfirs 08:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I am wondering why we say they are proper nouns. Just because a category thing has a name assigned to it by a groups of humans doesn't mean it is a proper noun. For example if I create a new type of rotors, and I name them rotators, is it a proper noun? For me proper nouns should be assigned to people, places, and unique things like Tower Bridge, The Moon, the UNO, etc. In English the days of the week are proper nouns which is weird for me, because there are many mondays, I don't see the point of making a proper noun, it is just "a noun" for something happening regularly, like pay day... So what in English defines what is a proper noun and not a common noun? --Lgriot (talk) 12:32, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

We have an article that should address your concern. Conventionally, the names of makes and models as opposed to types of vehicle (or any other artefact), such as Tornado vs jet fighter, fall into the category of proper nouns. In English the use of a capital initial letter is usually indicative, though this does not apply in some other languages such as German, which bestows capitals more generously. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.110.155 (talk) 14:38, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The article doesn't address the question, it does not mention makes or models. I guess in English people saw model names as an extension of the company name (company names are of course real proper nouns, since they are unique). Because many companies included their company name in the model (like Ford T), even when the company name was not included, the English speaking population decided that models names should be proper nouns all the time, rather than half the time.--Lgriot (talk) 09:02, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

March 22

Spanish translation help needed

If there's a better place for this that can provide something close to immediate assistance, please let me know...

Could someone who speaks Spanish please check the last few edits, and especially the source for those edits, of the Lupe Fuentes article? There are some BLP concerns but the source is in Spanish and I don't speak/read Spanish. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 00:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

They seem fine, factually speaking. The El País article reports on Fuentes/Zuleidy making offers in the second paragraph, then in the third they report that the police are looking for her (le is unlikely to refer to Lapiedra). It doesn't appear to say that Lapiedra said Fuentes was in charge, but rather a minor said that Fuentes went around making offers. Also, police sources - as far as I can see, rather than the "principals" - mention she was in ten films. - -- the Great Gavini 05:17, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

"Straighter" as a noun

Please help me understand what S. Maugham meant by the word "straighter" (as a noun). The context is the following: "You can buy a packet of straighters for three-pence". Please mind that it's "straighter", not "straightener". I cannot find it anywhere, so I would appreciate any help. It is probably a slang word of the time... Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fielig (talk • contribs) 13:27, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

OED Online – Straight: "A cigarette, esp. one containing ordinary tobacco as opposed to marijuana. [1923 J. Manchon Le Slang 296 A straight = a straighter = a straight cut, une cigarette en tabac de Virginie.]" I've created a Wiktionary entry; if you have a full citation for the Maugham quotation, you can add it to the entry (or post it here, and someone else will add it). — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 14:29, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

"Renamed as"

Is it standard in any variety of English? American English? Indian English? As in "The British Broadcasting Company was renamed as the British Broadcasting Corporation". As a speaker of British English I would leave out the "as" and say "The BBC was renamed the BBC". I see "renamed as" quite a lot in articles and don't know whether to correct it. Itsmejudith (talk) 17:00, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

In US English it sounds OK, but I would prefer "renamed to". Also, in your sentence above, I would put quotes around the names, since the subject of the discussion is the names themselves. StuRat (talk) 17:08, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Having been a professional editor in the United States for many years, I would say that, while renamed as is not uncommon in colloquial American English, it is substandard, and I endorse the edit you want to make. As for quotation marks, I disagree with StuRat. Quotation marks are generally used only for direct quotations. In used in a number of ways, but in the sentence you have cited, they would be out of place. Marco polo (talk) 17:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Quotation marks are used for far more than direct quotes. Here I refer to the "use-mention distinction". StuRat (talk) 19:15, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

That makes sense; thanks very much. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

StuRat, I'm aware of that use of quotation marks, and I've corrected my previous statement. I just think it's out of place in this case. Consider the following sentence:

"StuRat" was renamed "Stuart."

Maybe you would want quotation marks there, but I think they are out of place. The subject of the sentence is StuRat. (As you can see, I prefer italics for words singled out for attention as words, but quotation marks could have worked there, too.) The word StuRat is not being singled out for attention as a word in the sentence above. Rather the rest of the sentence is about StuRat, just as most sentences are about their subjects. I can see a case being made for quotation marks or italicization for Stuart, but in the sentence above, it would be superfluous, because the verb renamed indicates clearly that what follows is the new name. There is no need to set it off for clarity. I think that the sentence is clearer without unnecessary and somewhat ambiguous marking. Because quotation marks are also often used ironically (see Scare quotes), they are best avoided where any irony might be suspected. Marco polo (talk) 19:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes - quotes around the second name, which is being "mentioned", and not around the first name, which is being "used". Here I use ironic ironic quotes. 213.122.51.72 (talk) 20:57, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

March 23

Quarantania

Is the name of Mount Quarantania derived from the Italian "quarantana" (a period of forty days) or from the ML. "quarantena"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LShecut2nd (talk • contribs) 00:59, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

From the article Quarantania, I'm having a great deal of difficulty understanding whether it's meant to begin with [kw], ordinary [k], or Semitic "emphatic" q. I was under the vague impression that "Quarantania" was a spelling variation of Carantania... AnonMoos (talk) 03:41, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

It must ultimately be from Latin "quadraginta", as Jesus was fasting for forty days and nights in the desert at the time ("quadraginta" is in the Latin Vulgate text). The mountain itself is not named in the Bible, but "Quarantina" probably comes from medieval Italian or French pilgrims/crusaders. Adam Bishop (talk) 04:03, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Japanese recognition of simplified Chinese characters

Is it easier for Japanese people (those who have not studied any Chinese) to glean some meaning from Chinese texts written in traditional characters as opposed to simplified characters? Does it make much of a difference? 86.179.113.221 (talk) 03:50, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

See Simplified Chinese characters#Comparison with Japanese simplification.

—Wavelength (talk) 05:36, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm already aware of those facts, but I'm not sure how much difference it makes in practice to the intelligibility of written Chinese to Japanese speakers. 86.160.222.55 (talk) 12:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

"Computer codes"

I've been curious for a long time about the habit of journalists (especially) using the term "computer codes" to refer to computer programs (see e.g. this). If the word "code" is to be used, I feel that the term should be "computer code", and that "codes" is some kind of a mistake, based on a confusion between computer programming and cryptography, or access codes, or something like that. I've never been 100% sure though... What do others think? 86.179.113.221 (talk) 04:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Good day. Although opinion and fact blur a bit on this RD when it comes to usage, I'd note: "The reference desk does not answer requests for opinions or predictions about future events. Do not start a debate; please seek an internet forum instead." -- the Great Gavini 05:29, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

If this troubles you then assume the question asks "is this correct?" 86.160.222.55 (talk) 12:39, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

In the 1950s, the process of implementing abstract algorithms into specific assembly-language instructions was commonly known as "coding", and the terms "coding" or "source code" (as a non-pluralized mass noun, however) are still sometimes used. "Computer codes" in the plural would much more often refer to various character sets (such as ASCII, Unicode etc.), rather to software source... AnonMoos (talk) 06:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

See Autocode, Autocoder for old programming languages which claimed to do 1950's style "coding" automatically... AnonMoos (talk) 15:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

The plural "codes" used quite a lot in scientific circles, especially in fields like physics where they were already programming computers before computer science was an established field. It might even be the case that some journalists picked up the usage from scientists that they interviewed, but I have no evidence for that. 130.188.8.12 (talk) 08:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I'd have to see some examples of this usage, because it is not something I've come across. --LarryMac | Talk 11:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

See the link that I provided. 86.160.222.55 (talk) 12:34, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

The Jargon File has a relevant entry. Marnanel (talk) 14:32, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Latin American Spanish and noun plurals

Do words like "ordenadors" (instead of "ordenadores") appear in Latin American Spanish? I've never heard of it, but I'm asking because of this. Nadando (talk) 05:41, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

No way, surely some typo/vandalism?. It is indeed the plural Galician form for ordenador. Catalan has ordinadors. Pallida  Mors 05:55, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

flute mask

Reading about culture of Oceania I came across such item as 'flute mask'. I can't make out what is a flute mask. Flute is a musical instrument. Why does it need a mask? OK. They say it is to prevent it from touching by uninitiated persons. But how can the flute be played with some mask on it? Thank you. 188.35.19.57 (talk) 15:36, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I think the exact specifics vary from group to group, but often these flutes were sacred, and their usage was reserved for initiations of males. Females, or the uninitiated as you put it, were not only not allowed to touch the flute, they also weren't allowed to see the flute. I'm still looking for a good scholarly overview, but so far all I found were snippets from museum sites. I couldn't even find a description of the flutes or how exactly they were used or played, who played them, what they sounded like, etc. ---Sluzzelin talk 20:02, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Health care/Healthcare

I've seen both used. Even health-care! Using British English, which variant should I use when discussing American health care? 80.213.11.105 (talk) 16:19, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

My advice would be to check your dictionary and use whichever variant it prefers. The concept is the same on both sides of the Atlantic, so you shouldn't use a different variant when referring to American healthcare than you would referring to British healthcare. (Although my preferred variant is a single word, yours need not be.) Marco polo (talk) 17:29, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Alternatively, you could just ask yourself what imbues said dictionary (if "your dictionary" is a meaningful concept for you, given that you may have multiple or no preferred dictionaries) with the authority to prescribe whether a compound word is written as one or not, and choose a spelling you prefer, possibly even the maybe slightly subversive (!) spelling health-care. You may have your own favourite theories on the role of etymology, popular use, books (including dictionaries), the usage of editors in your favourite books, your education, what you perceive to be pleasing to the eye, etc., in writing. -- the Great Gavini 04:54, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I suppose you could create your own style sheet with your preferred spellings for various terms. Without some kind of guide, you are likely to spell the word inconsistently, which is not the worst thing that ever happened. On the other hand, such inconsistency looks unprofessional or undisciplined. What professional editors do, to ensure consistency and to save themselves the effort of recording their preferences for every term that has more than one possible variant, is to choose a dictionary and defer to it. Ideally, you want to compare dictionaries and choose one that suits you and that you generally respect, but choosing a dictionary and relying on it is not about submitting to authority. It is more about convenience and letting others do some of the work for you. Marco polo (talk) 15:24, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

MEDIUM OF VANASTHALI

IS VANASTHALI ENGLISH MEDIUM OR HINDI MEDIUM? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.248.64.154 (talk) 17:36, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

According to the FAQ page of Banasthali Vidyapith's own website: "Medium of instruction in school education is mainly Hindi. In Higher Education both English and Hindi are used as medium of instruction." [5] (If I misinterpreted your question, please clarify). ---Sluzzelin talk 19:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

It's a relief that Sluzzelin knew what the OP was asking about. I first read the question to be one about a medium called Vanasthali. Astronaut (talk) 04:00, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

There's an article Vanasthali, but it didn't seem to be relevant... AnonMoos (talk)

Jason Zebehazy

I would like to know who this person is. He supposedly is the author of many famous quotes, but does he actually exist? I would like to include one of his quotes in my wedding ceremony and therefore have been searching for some information about him.Lnmuntz (talk) 23:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

A Google search yields nothing but a single page of quotation sites, with none of those, at a cursory glance, offering any biographical information about him even where they are structured to do so. Furthermore, all of the quotes I read during that search were unfamiliar to this moderately well read, middle-aged individual, and all seemed rather trite and/or unoriginal in a general sense, such that any averagely intelligent person could plausibly have come up with them, so I personally wouldn't rate them as "famous" - your mileage may differ.

I suspect therefore that the name was invented in order to make spoof entries on one or more of the quotation sites (perhaps as a copyright trap, perhaps for other reasons), and that no such person exists. That said, it is essentially impossible to prove that someone doesn't exist; it is possible, if unlikely, for someone to have no internet presence; and the name could be the pseudonym, invented for these particular "quotes", of a real person better known by their real name. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.110.155 (talk) 01:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

March 24

extrémité/French skeletal anatomy

I am having some trouble with the sentence "des calcifications engainantes localisées, principalement rencontrées au niveau de la voûte crânienne et de l'extrémité distale du membre supérieur et inférieur gauche." I don't really speak French, so I've been using Google translate and relying on most of the science words being really similar. It is describing pathologies on a skeleton, and I get most of it, but I'm having trouble with the end. It's coming out as something like "and the distal end of upper and lower left," but that isn't a particularly helpful statement - does it mean the arms and legs, or the upper and lower halves of the arms?

Also, I'm having trouble with "extrémité" in general. Does it have a specific scientific use? How can I tell if a particular case means the ends of the arm bones, or the hand, or the fingers?

Thanks in advance. 174.30.208.36 (talk) 03:48, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

(1) I'm surprised it didn't translate membre, which, in most cases I've seen it, equates to English limb (it might also mean member as a certain other part of the body), which would mean the arms and legs. (2) I've also seen extrémités, plural, taken to mean limbs (although sometimes also the hands and feet). In the singular, it might just be end, as you suggested. -- the Great Gavini 05:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

(1) So its referring to the upper and lower left limb? I don't think it's plural, so what is it referring to - arm, leg, or both? (2) Thank you! So it's just a general sense, like in English I might say that there's evidence of infection in the bones of the arms? 174.30.208.36 (talk) 05:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

(1) Calcifications are localized [...] at the distal end of the upper left limb and of the lower left limb. My understanding (in French too): localized at the left arm, at the left leg or both.— AldoSyrt (talk) 09:08, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

And "distal" refers to the furthest of these extremities, i.e. fingers and toes on a human, although the original passage in French would seem to refer to an animal, so whatever the equivalent is in that species. --Xuxl (talk) 16:03, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

The original sentence is from this paper: Maladies dans l'Antiquité et au Moyen-Âge. Paléopathologie comparée des anciens Gallo-Romains et Hongrois It refers to a human fetus. According to the figure 30 of the paper, the effects of the congenital syphilis are not limited to the toes and to the fingers.— AldoSyrt (talk) 17:24, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I can't see the images from that, but thank you for another source! I'm actually looking at a different document, but it may just be a reprint or something. I'm still having some trouble with this, so I'm going to ask really specifically. I know that in this context "distal" should be referring to the end of specific bones, rather than limbs in general. Does it mean that the calcifications are at the distal ends of the left humerus, tibia, and fibula? 174.30.250.190 (talk) 05:46, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Most of the pictures are not shown, fortunately you can look at figure 30 on page 67 of the pdf file. The pathological areas are shown in black, normal are hatched and missing bones are in white. (A picture is worth a thousand words - attributed to Napoleon) — AldoSyrt (talk) 09:30, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Ooh, I missed that one. Thank you! 174.30.250.190 (talk) 15:57, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

O.T., but the RD pages aren't updating for me when logged out - does anyone know why that might be? -- the Great Gavini 05:08, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

That happens when they get overloaded. It should resolve itself. StuRat (talk) 20:55, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

The right way to represent an object or a thing

The student was found in the room with TV on top of him OR The student was found in the room with TV at top of him. Which of the above two sentences is correct ? This is precisely asked with respect to the use of "on" and "at" aniketnik 08:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aniketnik (talk • contribs)

I'd choose "on". I'd also use an article before "TV" - whether definite ("the") or indefinite ("a") will depend on the context the sentence appears in. If it's an isolated sentence, it doesn't matter which one - but you must have one for the sentence to sound idiomatic. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 09:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Agreed: "on top of" is the only idiomatic way to say this. I suppose there's also "atop" (as in "with the TV atop him") but that sounds rather strange and old-fashioned. (Perhaps "at top" comes from a mis-hearing of "atop".) AndrewWTaylor (talk) 12:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

O'bama instead of Obama

When Americans say O'bama, with what are they trying to associate the president? 77.231.17.82 (talk) 12:52, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Is there any other way of saying "Obama"? --TammyMoet (talk) 14:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

The O' prefix is typical of Irish surnames. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 14:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Saint Patrick's Day? — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 15:22, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

See also There's No One as Irish as Barack O'Bama Rojomoke (talk) 16:20, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Ah, yes, I forgot that Obama has Irish ancestry. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 18:46, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Russian language question

The second verse of the song "Moscow Nights" contains the phrases: "Речка движется и не движется" and "Песня слышится и не слышится". Literal translations could be "the river is moving and is not moving" / "a song is heard and is not heard". Somewhere way back I recall that this kind of form (postive + negative) is used in Russian to convey ambiguity, and can be translated as "the rivers seems to be moving" / "a song seems to be heard". My questions are: Is this a correct interpretation of this construction? Is there a linguistic term for this? Do other languages use this too? Thank you in advance! ---Sluzzelin talk 18:46, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

It seems to come down to the simile/metaphor difference. That is, do you say "that man is like iron" or "is iron" ? I would tend to go with the literal translation here, rather than risk introducing a subtle change in meaning. StuRat (talk) 20:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Literal translations are rife with issues, particularly when it comes to poems. Plus, Russian is especially rich in idiomatic expressions that simply do not mean what they seem to literally mean. My sense is of a river that seems to be hardly moving, maybe because it's being viewed from a distance in the moonlight (see this translation); and a snatch of a song that is faintly heard from afar, so faintly that the listener is not sure he's heard anything at all. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 22:52, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Right, but isn't it better to do the literal translation, then let the reader decide what it really means, than have the translator add in his opinion of what it means ? StuRat (talk) 23:28, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

No, not as a general approach. How do we know the readers could make any sense out of individual words all literally translated, unless they had some good knowledge of the source language and its idioms? Because, if they had that knowledge, they wouldn't generally be needing a translation into another language to begin with. "From the horse's mouth" is not generally translated into other languages by use of their words for "horse" and "mouth", because they don't share this idiom with English, and readers would be scratching their heads until Doomsday wondering what the reference to horses and their mouths was all about. Generally speaking, translations are for people who know the target language but not the source language. It's the translator's job to render the meaning as closely as possible, and it's a very tricky business. A translator is not just a machine that converts words, computer-like, from one language to another. They bring their own history and world-view and communication skills into the equation, and yes, their opinions. Which is why you can pick up 6 different translations of War and Peace and find that, while some passages are translated identically, many others differ in some material particulars. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 01:55, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

In a case where there's really only one possible translation, like "put your nose to the grindstone", then that's fine. But the cases given here seem to have multiple translations possible, so picking one at random does a disservice to the author. If he had intended for it to be unambiguous, he would have written it that way. StuRat (talk) 02:01, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

It's not "at random". Where do you get such ideas from, Stu? It's (assumed to be) the translator's conscientious belief as to what the writer intended, based on their own knowledge of Russian and its peculiar idioms, what they can discover about the writer and his style and his personal history particularly around the time the passage in question was written, etc. "If he had intended for it to be unambiguous, he would have written it that way" - how do you know he did in fact intend it to be ambiguous? Is your knowledge of Russian such that this conclusion is inescapable? I studied Russian for three years at university but I certainly can't answer this question. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 02:46, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I can't believe that either "Речка движется и не движется" or "Песня слышится и не слышится" has a single unambiguous interpretation. If you find a reliable source that says they do, then those would be good translations. Otherwise, they should be translated literally. StuRat (talk) 07:42, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks both of you! I am not seeking to write or publish or sing a translation, I want to know what it means to a native Russian speaker (which doesn't mean the answer needs to be provided by a native speaker). In English, this construction is quite unusual, no? - it sounds more like a Western translation of Zen poetry or something like that, to me anyway. What does the original mean to Russian ears? Is it as unusual, or is it actually a commonly used phrasing?

Jack, you may be on to something there, I had thought about coming back and adding that another translation might be "barely moving" and "barely heard", or hardly and faintly, as you put it. And thank you for that translation link. I still remain curious about this lyrical Russian construction in general, or is it more or less unique to this song? ---Sluzzelin talk 23:45, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I suspect that it means different things to different Russian speakers. Like many forms of art, poetry is often left to be interpreted by the viewer. In such a case, I believe that the artist's intent (that it should be left undefined), should be preserved. This type of oxymoron isn't unheard of English either, such as "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times". Imagine if that was hacked into "It was the best of times in some ways, such as .... while the worst of times in other ways, such as ...". StuRat (talk) 00:12, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Another possible meaning of "the river is moving and not moving" is that, while the water within the river moves, the river itself does not (well, it does, but only over the course of many years). StuRat (talk) 00:36, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Another possible meaning of "the song is heard and not heard" is that the words were heard, but the meaning was not truly understood. StuRat (talk) 00:47, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

---

Two possibly irrelevant comparisons: -- the river thing could be inspired by Heraclitus' most famous saying; and I don't know of any general linguistic construction "A is X and not-X", but some languages use a construction "A is X and B is not-X" as their version of the comparative (i.e. "John is strong and Mike is weak" would be those languages' way of saying "John is stronger than Mike")... AnonMoos (talk) 15:25, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Changing meaning of happiness

I've heard it said on tv or radio, more than once, that the meaning or definition of happiness was different in the past.

Is this true? What was its meaning in the past? Evidence-based answers are particularly welcome. Thanks 92.24.188.210 (talk) 21:58, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

This might be slightly off-topic, but the Inn of the Sixth Happiness seems to use a different meaning, where they are items that can be counted. This is likely a (mis)translation from Chinese, though. StuRat (talk) 22:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

If the commentary that you heard had to do with the phrase the pursuit of happiness, there is an argument that, by happiness, Thomas Jefferson meant the classical Greek concept of eudaimonia. See this article. Marco polo (talk) 18:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

My quick reading of that and the eudaimonia article suggests that the older meaning is that of doing your best, including being ethical, and provided you have done your best then you should be able to take misfortune(s) without being overcome by it. The modern meaning is more like continuous pleasure. Since people sometimes do things that will bring them unhappiness, such as taking part in wars or civil protests, then eudaimonia may be a higher goal than mere happiness. 92.28.242.170 (talk) 19:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I wonder if the full version of the Oxfiord English Dictionary gives any indication that the meaning has changed over the centuries. I do not have any access to it right now. 92.28.242.170 (talk) 19:11, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

March 25

Names for "second" and "minute" (units of time)

I am wondering about names for the "second" (the unit of time) in various languages. It seems that either:

1. the word for "second" is a loanword or
2. the word for "second" is derived from a word meaning "second" in the sense of "the first but one", or a phrase meaning "second part" (with a minute being the "first part" in this reckoning).

To me, this seems a bit strange. At least intuitively to me, it seems absurd to think of a second as a small subdivision of an hour (as implied by the words) rather than to think of an hour as an aggregate of seconds. Enough can happen in a few seconds, or even in a single second, that the interval is clearly not any kind of subdivision. Are there any counterexamples to my hypothesis? Perhaps the Chinese character "秒" will do, but I am not sure: at least in Japanese, this character can also mean an arcsecond. What is the etymology of this character, anyway?

Also, I am wondering about the word for "minute" in various languages as well. Where it is not a simple loanword, does it always mean a part or a piece of something etymologically? What surprises me is that I have never seen a root meaning "sixty" or "a sixtieth part" here, even though it is in terms of such that a minute is best described. Anyone adding hours on a timesheet knows exactly what I mean.

75.44.12.112 (talk) 07:02, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I believe that they did start as divisions of an hour, with "first" = minute, "second" = second, "third" = 1/60th second, and "fourth" = 1/60th of a "third". (I'm not sure why a second retained it's name but not a "first"/minute.) To understand why the hour was the primary unit, you have to understand that long ago, very few things had to be timed by the second, while many things were timed in hours. For example, if two people were going to meet, it would be set for a certain hour (as it often is today). Also, before clocks, a sundial could measure hours, but not seconds. See hour, minute, second, and units of time. StuRat (talk) 07:28, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't think a minute was ever referred to as a "first" - that's a sort of backronym. I think the sequence is: you have your unit (hour, degree, whatever). You find it convenient to divide it up in to little bits, which you call "minutes" (meaning "small" - the factor of sixty is not part of the meaning, but just what the Sumerian astronomers found natural). Later you find you want to subdivide minutes, so you invent a "second" division, and a "third".

I agree that it is interesting that these words are generally loan-translated, rather than, say substituting a word meaning "sixtieth". I don't know why that should be, except to note that terms of science and technology are often either borrowed or loan-translated. I'm thinking of German "Sauerstoff" and "Wasserstoff", which translate the "oxy-" and "hydro-" from the Greek roots of "oxygen" and "hydrogen". --ColinFine (talk) 08:34, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, if you look at the etymology of "second" [6], you see that it derives from the Latin for "secunda pars minuta (“second diminished part (of the hour)”)". When humans started keeping track of time, there really wasn't any way to measure times shorter than a day accurately. Probably the first tool that allowed you to do that was the sundial, which in practical use is only accurate to about an hour (etymology: "a period of time" [7]). When mechanical clocks were made, a finer subdivision of an hour were now possible, so the "minute" (from minūta [8] ("diminished" [9]) akin to minute/"small") was added. When clocks got really accurate, the second minute was added. Since even the second was probably more accurate than most humans need for day-to-day usage, it stopped there. -- 174.21.235.112 (talk) 16:39, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

"Second" is indeed the second fractional part of an hour, using sexagesimal fractions. An obscure word for 1/60 of a second is tierce. Although the first part may not ever have been called "first", according to our article, it was once called primus.

Also of interest is that, once upon a time, these fractional parts were indicated by roman-numeral superscripts -- that is, what we now write as 12:34:56 was once transcribed as 12 34^I 56^II. Over time the roman numerals evolved to single and double primes and/or quote marks, which are still used today for minutes and seconds of a degree: 12°34'56". (And also for feet and inches; dunno how that happened.) —Steve Summit (talk) 10:20, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Does that mean the degree sign ° started out as a superscript zero? Pais (talk) 16:44, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

The article ° confirms that. --Wrongfilter (talk) 17:28, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Everyday usage of Standard German in Germany

What German city uses the closest to Standard German variety in everyday usage nowadays? --Belchman (talk) 12:56, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I think Hanover has that reputation, but I can't vouch for the accuracy of the claim. Pais (talk) 13:00, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Its without direct reference, but de:Standarddeutsch calls the region around Hannover the one with the "best" Standard German, in accordance with my forespeaker. --129.206.196.211 (talk) 13:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

That article also says that until the 20th century, the best Standard German was spoken in Prague. Pais (talk) 16:51, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Hanover and the former Low German-speaking areas in general, because they esentially learned Standard German as a foreign language and weren't influenced by local dialects. "You write it, we read it" goes the quip, since Standard German evolved as a written language not based on a specific local High German variety. 80.123.210.172 (talk) 17:22, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I can confirm that Hanover has that reputation, although it's not completely pure Standard German either. The most obvious difference is that syllable-initial st or sp is pronounced essentially as in English (a general feature of northern forms of German), whereas in Standard German it is pronounced sht or shp the way everybody in the south does. I think they also tend to use idioms that are either local or antiquated, such as "das ist nicht an dem". Hanover German sounds affected to me (from the south) in a way that Standard German as used by the broadcasters never does. I think this may have something to do with vowel quality, but I am no expert. Hans Adler 17:42, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

German: -ess like in 'Delikatess'

I know that -ess is a suffix, and therefore 'Delikatess' does not mean "delicated food". Which other German words end with -ess? Quest09 (talk) 17:52, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

The German word is Delikatesse, not Delikatess. It is derived from the French délicatesse, meaning "delicacy". Marco polo (talk) 18:02, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Um, I always thought the word was Delikatessen, deriving from essen, which is German for eating. Looie496 (talk) 18:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Looking at the etymology, I think this is a sort of interlinguistic pun. In French -esse is a suffix, and délicatesse does mean "delicateness". But to a German, the word looks like "Delikat + esse", which translates as "fine food". In any case, "-esse" is not a standard suffix in German. Looie496 (talk) 18:12, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

It's not a pun that anyone would recognise unless you specifically draw attention to it by making it the punchline of a joke, for example. Delikatessen is simply the regular plural of Delikatesse, which is from French delicatesse and is in no way related to essen. Hans Adler 18:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I see that our delicatessen article actually explains this. Looie496 (talk) 18:29, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I would be surprised to learn that a suffix -ess exists in German. Delikatess (without the e) normally only appears in composite words such as Delikatess-Wurst. It doesn't really follow any regular pattern that I am aware of, and looks to me like 19th century marketing speak that has become part of the standard language. Hans Adler 18:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Maybe, then, the suffix is original from French only. But, do other loan French words with the same French suffix exist in German? Quest09 (talk) 18:19, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Of course: Petitesse, Finesse, Raffinesse, Mätresse, Noblesse. There are also words of Latin origin that do end in -ess, such as Abszess, Rezess, Prozess. Hans Adler 18:25, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

In the latter three cases, -ess is not a suffix, of course. If I'm not mistaken, Stewardess, Hostess(e), Baroness, Komtess all use a (originally) French diminutive suffix as a female gender marker (as does Mätresse). Tristesse goes along with Petitesse, Delikatesse and the like. --Jonas kork (talk) 19:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC)